US Deaths in Iraq Down Nearly 50 Percent Since Last Month
By Fred Lucas and Kevin Mooney
CNSNews.com Staff Writers
October 31, 2007
(1st Add: Corrects statistics in the story's eighth paragraph.)
(CNSNews.com) - U.S. combat deaths in Iraq for the last month have dropped by more than two-thirds compared with October of last year, while the total death toll has been reduced almost 50 percent since September.
An analysis by Cybercast News Service, based on Pentagon casualty reports, reflects a steady decline in the casualties, which the U.S. military says represents progress in Iraq.
There were 31 casualties in October 2007 (as reported through Oct. 28), of which 25 were combat-related. Last month, through Sept. 28, there were 38 combat-related deaths.
The bulk of deaths are still occurring in Baghdad, which was also true last year, and improvised explosive devices are still the most frequently used weapon by the terrorists. But IED attacks have still declined steadily.
Nonetheless, Maj. Winfield Danielson, a spokesman for the Multi-National Force-Iraq, was cautious in assessing the situation.
"I don't want to be too optimistic and say we turned a corner," Danielson told Cybercast News Service. "But success breeds success. The more havens we are able to find, the more encouraged Iraqi citizens will be to come forward and help us find people."
October reportedly marks the fifth consecutive month of decline in deaths, and the lowest level of casualties since March 2006. As noted, there were 31 American military casualties in Iraq reported by the Department of Defense through Oct. 28 -- 25 of those deaths were combat- related.
In the first 28 days of October 2006, the Pentagon reported 90 U.S. military casualties, 86 of which were combat-related. That's compared to the first 28 days of October 2007, when the Pentagon reported 31 U.S. military casualties, 25 of which were combat-related. That''s a 71 percent drop in combat deaths from October 2006 compared with October 2007.
This October also showed a 48 percent reduction from last month's total deaths, as the first 28 days of September saw 60 casualties, 38 from combat. That''s a 34 percent reduction in combat deaths.
The military credits much of the progress to the surge of 30,000 new troops, led by Gen. David H. Petraeus. However many war critics are quick to note that, despite the military progress, Iraq has been slow to achieve political progress.
"The additional troops we've had here as part of the surge allowed us to go into places since June and basically deny the terrorist organizations safe haven from which to plan their attacks and launch attacks from," Danielson said. "Our soldiers are more present on the ground with the Iraqi people. We found that has given us increased intelligence. They share with us a lot more where caches might be located and where terrorists might be found, and that also has enabled us to find a lot of terrorists that have previously been hidden."
After years of fending off the insurgency, military success was almost inevitable, said James Jay Carafano, defense and national security scholar with the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
"Leave the Army there long enough and they will figure out how to get the job done," Carafano told Cybercast News Service. "It's no different than Normandy or the trenches of World War I or any other place."
The change in the U.S. strategy made the difference, Carfano said.
"Three years ago, if you wanted to make money, you would just get yourself a video camera, plant an IED, blow something up, and take the video back to show that you did it and somebody would give you a couple of thousand dollars. Now you go out and plant an IED and what happens is you get your head blown off," Carafano said. "They've pretty much driven the amateurs off the battlefield. The only people left out there are the really bad people."
The tough part isn't over and political stability is still the key, Carafano said, adding this is primarily needed at the local level, such as the Al Anbar province, where Iraqis turned against al Qaeda terrorists.
"Obviously, you need Iraqi security forces that actually can provide security," he said. "You don't necessarily need political stability at the national level. It doesn't really matter that everyone in Baghdad agrees. Like you've seen at Anbar, you need local political leaders to get together to say we don't want these murderers in our area."
Update: Please read corresponding relevant news story.
The day nobody was killed in Iraq -- by Michelle Malkin
This is good news it points out definite progress in Iraq!
Awww Did I forget the poor libtards Boooohooo Don't worry babies maybe next time
bwahaaha
4 comments:
Is Pelosi crying in her beer, now that the number of dead Americans has dropped?
but the liberals will not concede that it means we are heading for victory - oh, no, the war is worse than ever, they say, and if there are deaths, it must be for other reasons, not the successes of American forces.
Baghdad=LA, about the same level of violence and drug trade, murder rate pretty even, including the bombs.
WOW! You mean the surge is...ahem working?
Post a Comment